The Trouble With Art Analysis

When in an art gallery that displays oil paintings from the Renaissance era, one might by mystified as to the true interpretation of such paintings. The majority of people today are unaware that they do not view oil paintings the way they were traditionally meant to be viewed. As we admire them, do we ever stop to analyze why they were painted in the first place, and for whom they were they painted for? By understanding why oil paintings depict certain things, consequently our view and interpretation of them will alter. Oil paintings were a luxury only the wealthy could partake in, seeking out artists that would be able paint their possessions in the most realistic way. Anthropologist Levi-Strauss comments “… rich Italian merchants looked upon painters as agents, who allowed them to confirm their possession of all that was beautiful and desirable in the world.” (qtd. in. Berger 86). It was the wealthy who ultimately instructed the artist what to paint, usually a possession they desired to be put on canvas. In John Berger’s book Ways of Seeing, he writes “Oil paintings often depict things. Things which in reality are buyable. To have a thing painted and put on a canvas is not

"Exploring Art: A Global, Thematic Approach, 5th Edition. "Exploring Art: A Global, Thematic Approach: Margaret Lazzari, Dona Schlesier: 9781285858166: Amazon.com: Books. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 July

In a world that has become immune to accepting all types of art, Marya Mannes believes we have lost our standards and ability to identify something as “good” or “bad”. In her essay, “How Do You Know It’s Good”, she discusses society’s tendency to accept everything out of fear of wrongly labelling something as being good or bad. She touches on various criteria to judge art, such as the artist’s purpose, skill and craftsmanship, originality, timelessness, as well as unity within a piece rather than chaos. She says that an individual must decide if something is good “on the basis of instinct, experience, and association” (Mannes). I believe that by using standards and the process of association, we will be able to judge what makes an art piece good in comparison to others. However, Mannes forces me to consider the difference between what may be appealing versus what is actually good, and when deciding which art we should accept, which is truly more important. I believe that “good” and “bad” are two ends of a large, subjective spectrum of grey area. It is possible for a piece of art to be good in some areas and bad in others, and if something does not live up to all of our standards, it does not necessarily mean it should be dismissed. Thus, I believe my personal standards for judging art are based on which my standards are largely based on the personal reaction evoked from a piece of art. Though I agree with Mannes’ standards to an extent, I believe that certain standards, such as evoking a personal response, can be more telling of if a piece of art is good as opposed to its timelessness, or the level of experience of an artist in his/her craft.

The Starry Night by Vincent Van Gogh is consistent of his typical artwork. He uses the lines free and loose making it an expression of his contour lines. The spacing between the stars and the curving contours making it a dot to dot effect. Van Gogh’s, The Starry Night” portrays his personal emotion. He writes to his brother about his painting almost as if he would be confused himself about the painting. The village is dark but at the same time it is peaceful compared to the dramatic sky life. In Sol Le Witts, Wall Drawing it uses an ordered form and symmetrical form called classical lines. The line Sol Le Witts uses is considered a connection between two separate points. Although

Kehinde Wiley is a New York based artist whose paintings focus on the themes of empowering black men and combining classical and contemporary styles.

- The lines of traditional art have blurred over the years as new artistic movements have appeared and transformed the notion of what is considered art. As these movements have revolutionized the art world, popular culture has branched off from art, causing a shift; art is no longer a representation of popular culture and visa versa. In contemporary society art doesn’t exist to win any popularity contests, it exists to please the viewer, and is often deemed art by highly acclaimed art critics who don't speak from a popular culture standpoint. Art highly regarded by critics often goes against the grain and makes a statement, while popular culture is dictated by what the general public likes,

The field of art history, like any discipline, is a wide and varied area of study. There are seemingly thousands of ways to interpret works of art and their places in history. Each has their own pros and cons and can greatly help to understand art and art-objects. In this semester’s Introduction to Art History course, we learned three different approaches art historians take when interpreting works of art: an object-oriented view, an artist-centered view, and an approach through medium. These approaches generally fall within one of two categories. The approaches through object and medium focus on readily apparent cues and symbols in the art object being studied. These approaches rely less on a study of history and more on visual evidence. The

By reviewing Julian Bell’s text, there are two principal accomplishments and two principal disappointments. Bell’s two principal accomplishments are his capacity to move quickly between continents, from a mournful crucifix in Cologne cathedral to a loving Indian couple on an erotic temple fresco at Khajuraho, allows him to make unexpected, cross-cultural comparisons at every turn. Tracing art history mostly in chronologically across the whole world and exploring connections between different cultures. Furthermore, like the time span runs from the emergence of art-like acts among the hominid ancestors of Homo sapiens to the present. The interpretation of the artworks from the world art, in Mirror of the World, are mapped onto a geo-chronological

Two artworks, made of dissimilar mediums, may seem to be complete opposites, but when their content is closely analyzed prove to be very comparable.

Purpose is to confront people looking at Branksome girls or maybe even private school kids in general that there is more to us than just private school mannerisms and interests. We're individuals not just a collective group of conforming students, stuck in the old outdated values of the school.

One can pretty much assume what the article, “Art Needs No Justification”, is about just by reading the title. There is no need to attempt to justify any piece of art because art does not need to have any justification. The thing that is interesting about this is that everything has to have a meaning or a function to life. Whether a person likes the function of it or not, it has a function nonetheless. Along with this, all things that are created have a job rather a person can see it or not this is all based on how a person perceives it. Art, rather that be a sculpture, painting, music, etc. all has to do with perception. This is the job that art takes on; this answers the question of what is the function of art. Art makes a person feel; people

When viewing any type of art it is vital to look at the piece as a whole. Though enjoyment can be had by just looking at physical appearance, the true significance of the piece cannot be reached without gaining knowledge of its origins. African art, specifically, to be fully savored must be further investigated to recognize its importance. Willett talks about how to fully interpret African art and how westerns are improperly viewing African art.

Who doesn't love styles to fashion like Calvin Klein to Gi gi gehee I love art I personally think art is closer to fashion by a long standing point. Its fascinating the texture the culture the style people don't get it it's like love in a way you can't talk about it look the feel. Just the amaze of an painting gives you an impression on your face doesn't matter how good or bad it gives you an emotion and people just don't understand it. I was never into fashion I just didn't get it I thought it was so stupid people dressing up in weird clothes looking like a futuristic superhero it just used to be really dumb but I turned out style is what u need little bit to be successful .

Humanity as depicted by artists reflects the values of a society. Different ages have held different perspectives on humanity. These varying perspectives are displayed through the creation of each artist, writer, and composer. An era is described by what is produced in it; therefore, the ideas about humanity displayed in each piece of artwork are the same ideas that shaped a particular era. By examining components of the various pieces produced in an era, one can determine the majority view of humanity during that time and trace the shifts in society’s perspective. As time has progressed, art transformed from having specific moral meaning to having purely subjective meaning.

As literary critics, Plato and Aristotle disagree profoundly about the value of art in human society. Plato attempts to strip artists of the power and prominence they enjoy in his society, while Aristotle tries to develop a method of inquiry to determine the merits of an individual work of art. It is interesting to note that these two disparate notions of art are based upon the same fundamental assumption: that art is a form of mimesis, imitation. Both philosophers are concerned with the artist's ability to have significant impact on others. It is the imitative function of art which promotes disdain in Plato and curiosity in Aristotle. Examining the reality that art